Judging expertise

When babus decide cases’ by Manoj Mitta (IE, November 13) seems to underline somewhere a genuine and legitimate concern o...

When babus decide cases’ by Manoj Mitta (IE, November 13) seems to underline somewhere a genuine and legitimate concern of millions of consumers who have taken WLL handsets. But unfortunately it poses a dangerous proposition to judge the competence of members of the TDSAT, and by implication a number of similarly constituted quasi-judicial bodies/tribunals.

Besides casting some unjustified remarks about the conduct and competence of two of the members of the TDSAT, it builds a pernicious theory of lack of judicial finding from the tribunals if the judgements delivered are by members who are not from the judiciary.

It creates suspicion and misunderstanding about the independence of such bodies by inventing totally absurd criteria. In most countries regulatory bodies are manned by persons who may not come from the judiciary. It is indeed sad that one remark made by the hon’ble chief justice is being stretched to tout a pre-conceived scheme to completely discount expertise and experience in particular fields of administration. This is not a question of turf between the judiciary and bureaucracy.
— V.S. Ailawadi, On e-mail

Story continues below this ad

Trouble within

Your editorial ‘Wake up, South Asia’ (November 12) rightly asks SAARC leaders to think creatively about regional synergy. However, if platitudes could change the world, we would all be living in a vastly better world.

The principal problem for South Asia remains the bigotry and hatred that emanates from Pakistan. To effect the change you seek, this problem must be taken into consideration.
— Gopal Vaidya, On e-mail

On a new base

Getting an airbase and a foothold for our forces in strategically located Tajikistan is a development that is bound to stand us in good stead in the years to come (‘Foothold in central Asia: India gets own military base’, IE, November 13).
— Raghubir Singh, Pune

On the brat pack

Most Indians would agree with Peter Roebuck (‘Indian cricketers are high on pampering, low on performance’, IE, November 14). India, unlike Australia, is not a ‘‘sporting nation’’ — and cricket is probably the only team sport we participate in at the international level.

Story continues below this ad

Frankly it’s more of an industry than a sport here. The sooner we realise that fields like education, health service and sport should not be fiddled with with the sole intent of making profit, the better we’ll perform at all levels.
— Sachin Kachroo, On e-mail

The batter’s case

Saurav Ganguly is right in blaming his bowlers for India’s defeat at the hands of Australia in the Bangalore one-dayer. That our bowlers picked up only one wicket (with Hayden being run out) and gave away nearly 350 runs in their allotted 50 overs is ample evidence that their bowling posed no threat to the Aussie batsmen.

For a team to maintain a consistent showing at the international level, it is essential to have a balanced act in all departments so that victory is achieved through a combined team effort, which is the secret to success in a game like cricket.
— V. Rajesh, On e-mail